Sovereignty Lies in the Hands of the World Community

Sovereignty is defined as having supreme and independent power or in government as possessed or claimed by a state or community. (Dictionary.com) Given this definition and reflecting upon today's contemporary politics, I would say that a group has sovereignty if it's people recognize its authority over them and the world community allows this to persist. In the past, sovereignty came simply with the ability to control and direct politics, trade, and military power within a state's borders. Now there are many states who claim these power over their people, and even exercise it to some extent, but because of the global order of nations, this is no longer enough. Allow me to explain.

Let's use North Korea as a case study. They exercise total and complete economic, political, and military power within their borders. While the U.N. may not agree with and even see the regime in North Korea as an oppressive dictatorship, they have done little to intervene and take authority away from them other than economic sanctions. I would argue that despite being a rogue state with a dis functional system, they remain sovereign because their authority has still remained in place and has been relatively unchanged. They still are allowed to persist in dictating their own state affairs. On the other hand if we look at Iraq, it was determined by at least the United States and NATO that Saddam Hussein's regime was dis functional and not valid to the point that we removed him from power. Despite the horrible things his regime did, he was in control and had authority to conduct his state's affairs as he saw fit. That is until the world community determined he no longer had the right to exercise sovereign power in his country.

The point I'm trying to make is that sovereignty is now in the hands of the global community. Every state if it maintains the three key elements of running a state can be seen as sovereign. However, this can change if the world community ceases to recognize a regime's authority to rule over its state. Because of the strong alliances and international cooperation that exists as a result of the WWII and the Cold War, states now must prove themselves to the world community that they have a right to govern their own state. This is a shift from just having to prove to one's own people that they have the power, authority, and capacity to rule over them.

Some entities that are seeking sovereignty like the Palestinians and the Chechens, still are struggling to prove to the world community that they deserve to exist autonomously. I believe if they could come up with a peaceable and sustainable system of governance over the people that identity themselves with the respective groups, the world would recognize them and put pressure on Israel and Russia to allow them some concessions. Palestine came close in 2003 and 2007, but issues like Hamas and Hezbollah rocket attacks in Israel sparked armed conflict that ended such talks. (The National) Similarly in Russia, the Chechens have no legitimacy for their cause in the eyes of the world because of the constant terrorist attacks. If these groups moved away from violence and towards more sensible means of dialogue, then they may have been able to sway world opinion in their favor to gain sovereignty for themselves.

Sources: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sovereignty
http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100902/FOREIGN/100909966/1002